God's Wrath

[jeremiah]

He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him." (John 3:36)...When Jesus says that in the future God's wrath will remain on a certain class of people...

i do not affirm UR, but it seems too much of a stretched extrapolation for the future tense mentioned to necessarily be evidence of the final fate of the wicked. it looks to me just like any "if X then Y" statement we make all the time. as in if i want to know what it feels like to run my wrist through a table saw, and try it, then i will find(future tense) that hand to longer be available to me. gross i know. the future tense in this case can simply be coloring the sure outcome of those who disobey the son of God, which may indeed extend to the last day. but i don't think this verse gives us any reason to think that is what jesus is referring to.

grace and peace...

[Perry]

Firstly, I don't know how you draw that conclusion from reading Rom 8:18.

Hi Todd,
I don't draw that conclusion from reading Rom 8:18. I do see that conclusion as a natural consequence of what I understand you're view of salvation to be, and, were I looking at Rom 8:18 from that perspective I don't see how I could draw any other conclusion. This present, mortal, finite life, when measured against the backdrop of eternity, shrinks to insignificance. It, in fact, becomes literally infinitesimal. If salvation is limited merely to avoiding the unpleasant consequences of sin in this present, mortal, finite life alone, then it too would shrink to the infinitesimal.

It is this concept, of measuring the pain of this present, mortal, finite life against the backdrop of eternal glory that I believe Paul is addressing in Rom 8:18.

So, I'm not saying that I believe salvation shrinks to insignificance. Rather, that it seems to me that you're saying exactly that when you suggest that salvation applies to this present, mortal, finite life alone.

Secondly, I don't see how the reconciliation of all mankind to God is akin to a self-help book.

That's very strawmanish. I'm not saying any such thing.

BTW, I'm really, really, really trying not level straw man attacks against your view either. That's why I keep throwing in these parentheticals. I'm attempting to address this notion that the consequences of salvation are limited to this current life only, which seems to me to be what you're suggesting. If it is not what you're suggesting, then I've totally misunderstood you're view, and we're talking past each other, and I am, in fact, beating on a scarecrow.

I'm not trying to trivialize the idea of reconciliation of all mankind. As I've said several times, I would love to adopt that view. I really would. In fact, it's probably to the point of not being as balanced as I should be on the topic. It's almost as though I'm looking for an excuse to adopt the view of the reconciliation of all mankind.

What I was trying to say is that, if salvation is limited to this life and this life alone, and if it is limited to avoiding the unpleasantness that comes from sinning in this life and in this life alone, then, the Bible is just about avoiding the negative consequences of sin in this life and in this life alone. There are a lot of self-help books that will help me do the same thing.

This all comes down to a very different view of the definition of salvation. I want to be very clear, that if you're not advocating that salvation is limited to what happens to us in this life alone, then pretty much everything I've posted in my last two posts doesn't even apply.

If that is what you affirm, I have a couple of other questions for you.

Be blessed.

[Todd]

If salvation is limited merely to avoiding the unpleasant consequences of sin in this present, mortal, finite life alone, then it too would shrink to the infinitesimal.

What I have said is that salvation comes in two parts. There is salvation in this mortal life, yes; but there is also salvation from death. The first is conditional and requires repentance and faith; the second in unconditional.

I don't believe there is a hell (in the common understanding of the word). But I do believe that without Christ no one will be raised from the dead; no one will be in heaven with God. What I believe is that all who have ever lived will be raised from death (death destroyed), all will be changed, and God will be all in all.

Todd

[Paidion]

Perry, I have been wondering how you would view my stance.

I, like Todd, also believe that salvation is essentially salvation from sin, so that our character is purified. But my position is that when were are regenerated, we are changed, so that we will be fitted to live with God. I disbelieve that God will "take in" any rebels. I also disbelieve that there will be an instant change in a person's character in the resurrection because Jesus died for all. The following passage says it all:

For the love of Christ controls us, because we have concluded this: that one has died for all, therefore all have died; and he died for all, that those who live might no longer live for themselves but for him who for their sake died and was raised. From now on, therefore, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we once regarded Christ according to the flesh, we regard him thus no longer. Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come. All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation; that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation. Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. Working together with him, then, we appeal to you not to receive the grace of God in vain. (2 Cor. 5:14-6:1)

To become the righteousness of God does not mean God's righteousness being thrust upon us or imputed to us. Rather it means that just as Christ was made the object of sin by the wicked ones who put Him to death, so we will be made the object of righteousness by God — not a pretending righteousness, but a real righteousness, God's righteousness, made available to us by the enabling grace of God (see Titus 2). In attaining righteousness we must "work together with God". We can't attain it by self-effort. But neither will God force it upon us if we do not coöperate with His enabling grace.

He who began a good work in us will bring it to completion in the day of Jesus Christ. We need to be prepared by God, in order to be with God forever. Salvation from sin unto righteousness is a process, but will some day be complete. Those who don't yield to the process of salvation will need to be dealt with by God some day until they repent (have a change of heart and mind) and submit to the authority of Christ. Perhaps even Christians will require the refining fire of God, for "Everyone will be salted with fire."
Christ gave a parable about three slaves who were to take care of the Master's house while he was gone. All three were SLAVES of their master. Each of the three did wrong, but the correction the master gave them was related to their attitudes:

... if that servant says to himself, ‘My master is delayed in coming,’ and begins to beat the male and female servants, and to eat and drink and get drunk, the master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he does not know, and will cut him in pieces and put him with the unfaithful. And that servant who knew his master’s will but did not get ready or act according to his will, will receive a severe beating. But the one who did not know, and did what deserved a beating, will receive a light beating. Everyone to whom much was given, of him much will be required, and from him to whom they entrusted much, they will demand the more. (Luke 12:45-48)

Many a "Christian" thinks he is completely "off the hook" because Jesus died for him, and he said a prayer asking Jesus into his heart (or he "accepted Him as his personal Saviour, or he "trusted in the finished work of Christ", or ....). The formulae vary. But God doesn't care about any of that. He is interested in RIGHTEOUSNESS, and will settle for nothing less. He has made provision for righteousness, but it's a narrow path, and few find it in this life. But God never gives up on anyone, and ALL of His judgments are remedial! He is not willing that ANY should perish, and will do whatever it takes to bring that about!

Jesus concluded his parable of the three slaves with these words:

I came to cast fire on the earth, and would that it were already kindled! I have a baptism to be baptized with, and how great is my distress until it is accomplished! (verses 49 and 50)

Jesus wished with all His heart that the fire of purification were already started — so deep was His love for people. He wanted to see that baptism of fire started! He even had great distress while waiting for it to be accomplished!

[Homer]

Jeremiah,

You wrote:

i do not affirm UR, but it seems too much of a stretched extrapolation for the future tense mentioned to necessarily be evidence of the final fate of the wicked. it looks to me just like any "if X then Y" statement we make all the time. as in if i want to know what it feels like to run my wrist through a table saw, and try it, then i will find(future tense) that hand to longer be available to me. gross i know. the future tense in this case can simply be coloring the sure outcome of those who disobey the son of God, which may indeed extend to the last day. but i don't think this verse gives us any reason to think that is what jesus is referring to.

If you had never been to China and Jesus said "Jeremiah will not in the future go to China" do you think you might nevertheless go to China someday?

[Homer]

Paidion,

You wrote:

To become the righteousness of God does not mean God's righteousness being thrust upon us or imputed to us.

I believe Jesus spoke of imputed righteousness in the following parable:

Matthew 22:1-14
New King James Version (NKJV)

The Parable of the Wedding Feast
22. And Jesus answered and spoke to them again by parables and said: 2. “The kingdom of heaven is like a certain king who arranged a marriage for his son, 3. and sent out his servants to call those who were invited to the wedding; and they were not willing to come. 4. Again, he sent out other servants, saying, ‘Tell those who are invited, “See, I have prepared my dinner; my oxen and fatted cattle are killed, and all things are ready. Come to the wedding.”’ 5. But they made light of it and went their ways, one to his own farm, another to his business. 6. And the rest seized his servants, treated them spitefully, and killed them. 7. But when the king heard about it, he was furious. And he sent out his armies, destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city. 8. Then he said to his servants, ‘The wedding is ready, but those who were invited were not worthy. 9. Therefore go into the highways, and as many as you find, invite to the wedding.’ 10. So those servants went out into the highways and gathered together all whom they found, both bad and good. And the wedding hall was filled with guests.

11. “But when the king came in to see the guests, he saw a man there who did not have on a wedding garment. 12. So he said to him, ‘Friend, how did you come in here without a wedding garment?’ And he was speechless. 13. Then the king said to the servants, ‘Bind him hand and foot, take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’

14. “For many are called, but few are chosen.”

So the servants went out to the highways and brought people in who were no doubt poor (approximately 98% of the population) with no wedding garment or time and money to procure one. How were they supposed to have one if it was not provided for them? Phillip Schaff tells of Lucullus who had "not less than 5,000 mantles in his wardrobe and of the king of Persia "who gave away an infinite number of dresses". It is inconceivable that the poor could have provided their own garments.

Alford comments: "The garment is the imputed and inherent righteousness of the Lord Jesus put on symbolically in baptism and really by a true and living faith without which none can appear before God in His kingdom of glory...

How do you think the man would have obtained the garment?

[jeremiah]

hello homer,

i was probably a little vague in my intention. i thought starting with not affirming UR would be clear enough. but i do agree with paidion's statement of the abiding wrath of God upon the unbeliever in john 3:36 not (necessarily) being relevant to a correct view of hell. personally, i am reminded of romans 2:5 when i read john 3:36, and i'm 99% sure the scriptures teach a form of annihilationism to be the fate of the wicked. but i recognize that neither of these verses explicitly say that. i think one who sees the lake of fire as the immersion of fire that purifies the wicked has a reasonable understanding (and an equally tremulous fear) of romans 2:5. that said...

If you had never been to China and Jesus said "Jeremiah will not in the future go to China" do you think you might nevertheless go to China someday?

no, of course not. "abides" is in the future tense, but so what, the future tense doesn't point us to only one possible conclusion. in fact, hypothetical statements like john 3:36 will naturally have their outcome in a future tense. i think you're attempting to argue from silence, because i agree with paidion that this does not say "the wrath of God abides on him without end..." to me it seems any future tense in there would be related to the person's state as one who does not believe the son. again, as in...if you do not believe the son, then the wrath of God will abide on you.

grace and peace...

[Homer]

Jeremiah,

I think you have missed the point.

...whoever rejects the Son will not (in the future) see (eternal) life....

The "not seeing life" is future tense, the "wrath" remains is present active tense.

[Paidion]

Hi Homer,
Thank you for bringing out the parable of the man who could not get into the wedding without a wedding garment. This parable seems to well illustrate the need for righteousness in order to get into the wedding supper of the Lamb. I think it fits very well with my own understanding of the REAL righteousness which is necessary in order to be forever with the Lord.

Before I explain, let me say I fully agree with you that the poor man could not have afforded the wedding garment himself. It had to be provided by the king. So I think we agree that none of us can provide our own garment of righteousness in order to get into the Kingdom. In other words self-effort is not sufficient for righteousness.

So if the king was providing the wedding garments, why wasn't this fellow wearing one? Indeed, in the very text you quoted, the king asks him, "Friend, how did you come in here without a wedding garment?" So how did he manage to get in without a wedding garment? He must have slipped by the king of whoever was standing there handing out the wedding garments to the guests. The problem was not that the king had not provided a garment for him; the problem was that he did not do his part, stop, and put it on.

So as I have maintained, God provides enabling grace for us to be righteous (the wedding garment). But that is not enough unless we coöperate with God (put on the garment).

As Paul put it:

For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. Working together with him, then, we appeal to you not to receive the grace of God in vain. (2 Cor. 5:21, 6:1)

This is the way we receive the righteousness which God provides. We need to work together with Him in order to have it. He enables us through His grace; we by faith believe that His enabling grace was provided by Christ's sacrifice, and so we yield; we coöperate fully. God won't force the wedding garment on us. We don't have what it takes to provide our own. But when we work together with him then real righteousness will become a reality!

On the other hand, if we do nothing, saying, "It's not of works, you know," expecting God to thrust His righteousness upon us whether we coöperate or not because we have "accepted Christ", expecting Him, by his grace, to impute righteousness to us, or count us righteous regardless of how we live ("Good works are of no avail") then we will have "received the grace of God in vain"!

[Homer]

Paidion,

I think perhaps there is no disagreement between us. I see "imputed righteousness" as God providing His righteousness (Christ) which we must put on (and keep on).